138 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



secure under the circumstances which attend 

 legislation in Congress at this time. 



"I propose as briefly as possible to call the 

 attention of the House to the changes in ex- 

 isting law proposed by the bill under consider- 

 ation. 



"The first amendment proposes to change 

 the minimum jurisdiction of the circuit courts 

 of the United States from $500 to $2,000, ex- 

 clusive of costs and interest. 



" It will be remembered that the present 

 minimum jurisdiction of the circuit courts was 

 fixed at $500 by the act of 1789. It is be- 

 lieved, in view of the unprecedented growth of 

 business and the great increase of population 

 since 1789, that $2,000, exclusive of interest 

 and costs, would not be too large. The present 

 minimum was fixed when the population of 

 the country did not exceed four millions, and 

 when the business of the country as compared 

 with present circumstances was undeveloped. 



"In almost ail the States of the Union the 

 circuit courts are crowded and overloaded with 

 business. It is almost impossible in many of 

 the States to accomplish an end to litigation 

 in those courts. This condition of affairs is 

 attributable mainly to the small amount at 

 which the minimum jurisdiction is fixed, the 

 enlarged subject-matter of jurisdiction, and the 

 facility and ease by which causes may be re- 

 moved from State to Federal courts. 



" The Supreme Court, with jurisdiction of 

 appeals, with a minimum limit of $5,000, and 

 a revisory jurisdiction of other causes, without 

 regard to the sum or amount in controversy, 

 is unable to dispose of the business which has 

 accumulated upon its docket. 



"I now. call the attention of the House to 

 the changes proposed in the law regulating the 

 removal of causes from a State to a Federal 

 court. The committee propose to strike out 

 that part of section 2 of the act of 1875 which 

 reads as follows : 



" SECTION 2. That any suit of a civil nature, at law 

 or in equity, now pending or hereafter brought in any 

 State court, when the matter in dispute, exclusive of 

 costs, exceeds the sum or value of $500, and arising 

 under the Constitution or laws of the United States, 

 or treaties made or which shall be made under their 

 authority, or in which the United States shall be 

 plaintiff' or petitioner, or when there shall be a con- 

 troversy between citizens of different States, or a con- 

 troversy between citizens of the same State, claiming 

 lands under different States, or a controversy between 

 citizens of a State and foreign states, citizens or sub- 

 jects, either party may remove said suit into the cir- 

 cuit court of the United States for the proper district. 



" And in lieu of it to insert into section 2 

 the following, as shown by the bill which is 

 now under consideration : 



"SEC. 2. That any suit of a civil nature, cither at 

 law or in equity, of which the circuit courts of the 

 United States are given original jurisdiction by the 

 last preceding section, but which may be now pend- 

 ing, or which may hereafter be brought in any State 

 court, may be removed by the defendant or defend- 

 ants therein to the circuit court of the United States 

 for the proper district. 



" It will be observed, Mr. Speaker, that the 



mischief intended to be remedied by the com- 

 mittee arises from the authority granted by 

 the act of 1875 to either the plaintiff or de- 

 fendant to remove the cause. It was the opin- 

 ion of the committee, and I believe unanimous 

 in that regard, that a plaintiff, who, having the 

 right to sue in the Federal court, shall have 

 elected to bring his suit in a State court, ought 

 to oe neld to his election. 



" In this connection I desire to call attention 

 to the amendment offered by me at the outset. 

 My amendment proposes as follows : 



" Strike out all from the word ' follows ' in line 47, 

 down to the word ' and ' in line 54, and insert : 



" SEC. 2. That any suit of a civil nature, at law or 

 in equity, arising under the Constitution or laws of 

 the United States, or treaties made or which shall be 

 made under their authority of which the circuit courts 

 of the United States are given original jurisdiction by 

 the preceding section, which may now be pending or 

 which may hereafter be brought in any State court, 

 may be removed by the defendant or defendants there- 

 in to the circuit court of the United States for the 

 proper district whenever it is made to appear from 

 the application of such defendant or defendants that 

 his or their defense depends in whole or in part upon 

 a correct construction of some provision of the Con- 

 stitution or law of the United States or treaty made 

 by their authority. And any other suit of a civil 

 nature, at law or in equity, of which the circuit courts 

 of the United States are given jurisdiction by the pre- 

 ceding section, and which are 'now pending or which 

 may Hereafter be brought in any State court, may be 

 removed into the circuit court of the United States for 

 the p_roper district by the defendant or defendants 

 therein : Provided. Such defendant or defendants arc 

 non-residents of the State in which the suit is pend- 

 ing. 



" I think that this amendment ought to be 

 adopted, and so much of the bill of the com- 

 mittee as is referred to in the amendment 

 should be stricken out. 



"I submit that if the bill of the committee 

 should become the law, any defendant will be 

 authorized to remove a cause whether he is a 

 resident or not of the State in which the suit 

 is brought. I do not believe that the commit- 

 tee contemplated the scope to which that pro- 

 vision in its bill extends. 



" By reference to the provisions under dis- 

 cussion, it will appear that any suit, of which 

 the circuit court is given original jurisdiction 

 by the bill, which may be pending or hereafter 

 brought in a State court, may be removed to a 

 Federal court ' by the defendant or defendants.' 

 Suppose a citizen of Illinois sues a citizen of 

 Texas in a State court in Texas, under the 

 provision reported from the committee, such 

 a defendant is authorized to remove the cause. 

 Now, the amendment which I propose obvi- 

 ates such results. 



" The next change proposed in the law is a 

 very important one. 



" The committee propose to add to section 3 

 of the act of 1875 the following : 



" That the circuit courts of the United States shall 

 not take original cognizance of any suit of a civil 

 nature, whether at common law or in equity, between 

 a corporation created or organized by or under the 

 laws of any State and a citizen of any State in which 

 such corporation, at the time the cause of action ac- 



